Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:32:20 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: >> I looked at this first, and it is very hard on the server. >> Every pull or clone you do to update things works like an initial >> clone, so it takes pretty massive resources. > Surely, then the recommended approach involves: > 1. Selecting pages [1] > 2. Limiting clone depth [2] > Or at least, encouraging the use of by_rev [3] That will change it from being completely unusable to barely usable. Still it isn't something I would want to use on a daily basis. I have tried it when helping with the conversion of the GLEPs. For fetching only, so I don't know what would happen when trying to push a page back to the wiki. Ulrich > 1: > https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#limit-the-pages-to-be-imported > 2: > https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#shallow-imports > 3: > https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#optimizing-git-fetch pgpgSbryKAZip.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 12:34:33PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:32:20 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: > > > I looked at this first, and it is very hard on the server. > > Every pull or clone you do to update things works like an initial clone, > > so it takes pretty massive resources. > > Surely, then the recommended approach involves: > > 1. Selecting pages [1] > 2. Limiting clone depth [2] > > Or at least, encouraging the use of by_rev [3] > > 1: > https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#limit-the-pages-to-be-imported > 2: > https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#shallow-imports > 3: > https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#optimizing-git-fetch > > There are also other issues I'm not really familiar with because of how mediawiki's error handling works (Patrick could tell you more about this than I can). William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:32:20 -0500 William Hubbs wrote: > I looked at this first, and it is very hard on the server. > Every pull or clone you do to update things works like an initial clone, > so it takes pretty massive resources. Surely, then the recommended approach involves: 1. Selecting pages [1] 2. Limiting clone depth [2] Or at least, encouraging the use of by_rev [3] 1: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#limit-the-pages-to-be-imported 2: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#shallow-imports 3: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#optimizing-git-fetch pgpcwjyBR3Fd7.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:44:42 -0500 William Hubbs wrote: > Have you even looked at gollum for example? it can support mw markdown. I've looked at it, but none of my reading of online material indicates whether it supports more than the existing media-wiki *syntax*. For instance, Gollum states support for macros, but definition of those macros requires writing ruby code, which is a far stretch from MediaWiki's "other wiki articles are your macros" Nothing I've read clarifies my confusion as to whether gollum actually supports all the *features* of MediaWiki, only seeming to indicate it supports syntax-mimicry. Which, if true, would fall into the category of "Not a suitable replacement" pgp1pVq15WwQf.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 01:26:51PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 12:44:11 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: > > > Yes I would benefit from this change, but it is not a case of optimizing > > for one. It is a case of opening up the use of the wiki to the largest > > audiance possible. This is just good universal design. > > Unfortunately, my experience with wiki's indicates that's not really an > option we have. > > There are lots of different formats, sure, but lots of those formats > reduce to being restrictive, declarative formats, where "content" is > stuffed into a range of formats predefined in the markups syntax. > > This ultimately ends up *restricting* the range of *visual* tools at > our disposal for distinguishing details on a case-by-case basis, by > forcing all details to adhere to a universally simplified scheme. > > While I do appreciate the difficulty presented to people with > sight-impairment, I'd opt primarily for choices that help them > *without* compromising the range of options we have for visual > distinguishers. That's the whole point of the discussion. Have you even looked at gollum for example? it can support mw markdown. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 11:08:10AM +0200, Nils Freydank wrote: > Am Dienstag, 3. Juli 2018, 19:39:43 CEST schrieb William Hubbs: > > All, > > > > some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring > > it up here as well. > > > > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? > What about https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki? > "Gate between Git and Mediawiki" sounds as it would be the right extension > while mediawiki can be kept. I looked at this first, and it is very hard on the server. Every pull or clone you do to update things works like an initial clone, so it takes pretty massive resources. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
Am Dienstag, 3. Juli 2018, 19:39:43 CEST schrieb William Hubbs: > All, > > some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring > it up here as well. > > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? What about https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki? "Gate between Git and Mediawiki" sounds as it would be the right extension while mediawiki can be kept. Best Regards Nils Freydank signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 12:44:11 -0500 William Hubbs wrote: > Yes I would benefit from this change, but it is not a case of optimizing > for one. It is a case of opening up the use of the wiki to the largest > audiance possible. This is just good universal design. Unfortunately, my experience with wiki's indicates that's not really an option we have. There are lots of different formats, sure, but lots of those formats reduce to being restrictive, declarative formats, where "content" is stuffed into a range of formats predefined in the markups syntax. This ultimately ends up *restricting* the range of *visual* tools at our disposal for distinguishing details on a case-by-case basis, by forcing all details to adhere to a universally simplified scheme. While I do appreciate the difficulty presented to people with sight-impairment, I'd opt primarily for choices that help them *without* compromising the range of options we have for visual distinguishers. Just as it stands, a syntax that is represented as a simplification of HTML via templates, where new terms can be created in terms of HTML, and where raw HTML can be used in a pinch, tends to make the best of these options for unimpaired people. Its a shitty situation all round really, because as best as I can tell, there's no choice without some painful compromise for somebody. So while a universal design is an admirable goal, I fear in practice it will have the same results as what "universal interfaces" achieve: A reduction in net functionality because the more interesting/advanced functionality is out of the reach of some users. ( Yes, yes, I'm aware of my sight-privilege talking ) pgpJsb4iekax9.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
>> some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring >> it up here as well. >> >> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing >> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very >> nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format >> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. > > I assume that your primary reason for wanting to replace mediawiki is > to improve accessibility. I suggest you state that more clearly when > making such a proposal. I see. Is it possible to improve the accessibility for mediawiki and do we have volunteers to do that? -- Best, Jonas signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 10:31:20PM -0400, Matt Turner wrote: > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 1:39 PM William Hubbs wrote: > > > > All, > > > > some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring > > it up here as well. > > > > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very > > nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format > > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. > > I assume that your primary reason for wanting to replace mediawiki is > to improve accessibility. I suggest you state that more clearly when > making such a proposal. Everyone would benefit, so it isn't specifically tied to that. I see it more tied to universal design, which accessibility is a part of. If you want to edit with a browser like you do now, you would be able to continue doing that. But, if you want to edit files locally and use git to push your changes, that would be an option as well. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 07:21:53PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 12:39:43 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: > > > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very > > nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format > > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. > > 1. Who are the primary beneficiaries of this suggestion?: > > a. People with expert knowledge of development systems and people > with Gentoo Privileges > > b. End users who may not be experts, in all things development, but > may be able to contribute and consume content. Anyone really could benefit from it. The replacements are wikis, so if you want to edit via the web like you do now, that's still available. > > 2. What compromises in flexibility does this create? Eg: Do suggested >replacements have capacity to have arbitrary HTML and templating? Or >are they restricted to the terribly narrow featureset of Markdown? Several of them support multiple formats, so that would depend on the replacement chosen. > If you're optimising for 1-a and your choice of compromise results in a > reduction in functionality with regards to clear, flexible, and > expressive content, it will be hard to sell me on the idea. Yes I would benefit from this change, but it is not a case of optimizing for one. It is a case of opening up the use of the wiki to the largest audiance possible. This is just good universal design. Thanks, William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 19:21:53 +1200 Kent Fredric wrote: > On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 12:39:43 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: > > > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into > > killing mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It > > would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or > > another similar format and use git to control the changes instead > > of editing in a browser. > > 1. Who are the primary beneficiaries of this suggestion?: > > a. People with expert knowledge of development systems and people > with Gentoo Privileges > > b. End users who may not be experts, in all things development, but > may be able to contribute and consume content. > > 2. What compromises in flexibility does this create? Eg: Do suggested >replacements have capacity to have arbitrary HTML and templating? > Or are they restricted to the terribly narrow featureset of Markdown? > > > If you're optimising for 1-a and your choice of compromise results in > a reduction in functionality with regards to clear, flexible, and > expressive content, it will be hard to sell me on the idea. > 3) The ability of someone with a sight disability, the actual ability to contribute to the project. We as a project should try make our documentation accessible to as broad an audience as possible. I know from personal experience and having worked with such a person, to make it possible to work with cli tools to be able to interact with normally browser only visual interfaces which are extremely poor to work with using a screen reader. At my work, I personally made a github python library and cli interface for github, and worked to create templates for a go-jira command line interface so a visually impaired co-worker could interact with those systems. -- Brian Dolbec pgp2ADbD_1YTy.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 12:39:43 -0500 William Hubbs wrote: > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very > nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. 1. Who are the primary beneficiaries of this suggestion?: a. People with expert knowledge of development systems and people with Gentoo Privileges b. End users who may not be experts, in all things development, but may be able to contribute and consume content. 2. What compromises in flexibility does this create? Eg: Do suggested replacements have capacity to have arbitrary HTML and templating? Or are they restricted to the terribly narrow featureset of Markdown? If you're optimising for 1-a and your choice of compromise results in a reduction in functionality with regards to clear, flexible, and expressive content, it will be hard to sell me on the idea. pgpuiVJqzWy00.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 1:39 PM William Hubbs wrote: > > All, > > some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring > it up here as well. > > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very > nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. I assume that your primary reason for wanting to replace mediawiki is to improve accessibility. I suggest you state that more clearly when making such a proposal. I read from jstein's email that he does not have the same knowledge of the situation that I have, and so his reply is expectedly different from mine.
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:09:16PM +0100, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 03/07/18 21:01, William Hubbs wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:20:53PM +0200, Jonas Stein wrote: > >>> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > >>> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? > >> I think the wiki is very useful and should remain. > > Like I said, there are wiki packages out there like gollum, ikiwiki, and > > probably others which would allow editing of content via text files and > > use vcs's for version control of the changes, so I'm not advocating for > > shutting down the wiki. I think we should have one that is more > > accessible to users who want to use different interfaces. We shouldn't > > be forcing users to use a full web browser just to contribute to the > > wiki. > > > >>> It would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or > >>> another similar format > >>> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. > >> I think it is more efficient to convert your yearly contributions to the > >> wiki [1] manually from markdown to mediawiki, instead to convert the > >> existent wiki pages to anything plus setup a new engine and configure > >> user accounts. > > If that is converted from markdown, all you would have to do is use the > > markdown directly if the new wiki supports it. > > > >> Btw: Would a conversion to another wiki mean that we get another long > >> footer on every wikipage "This page was edited by... do not remove..."? > > I have no idea about that, but that alone shouldn't stop this from > > happening. > > > >> For the special case of the Gentoo Manual: > >> I think the Gentoo Manual is better maintained in a git repository, > >> because it was initially written like a book and sometimes it is better > >> to make PRs for the manual. > > I don't really see the manual as a special case. We should use the same > > interface for everything. > > > > William > 1) I think this idea was floated before, and failed before .. That's not a reason for not floating it again. > 2) Existing wiki team are badly understaffed, how would this improve > things? How would new maintainers be registered and managed? It improves things by offering more flexable ways for users to edit the wiki. if you want to use a browser you can, or you can use something like git and edit the content that way. I don't know for sure how maintainers would be registered and managed, but I don't know that on mw either. > 3) Are you volunteering to implement this change yourself (infra are > equally understaffed) and manage the change and transition, in addition > to your existing commitments? I'm not on the infra team, so I would have to be added there to be able to do it I guess, but I would be willing to assist if I could. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On 03/07/18 21:01, William Hubbs wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:20:53PM +0200, Jonas Stein wrote: >>> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing >>> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? >> I think the wiki is very useful and should remain. > Like I said, there are wiki packages out there like gollum, ikiwiki, and > probably others which would allow editing of content via text files and > use vcs's for version control of the changes, so I'm not advocating for > shutting down the wiki. I think we should have one that is more > accessible to users who want to use different interfaces. We shouldn't > be forcing users to use a full web browser just to contribute to the > wiki. > >>> It would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another >>> similar format >>> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. >> I think it is more efficient to convert your yearly contributions to the >> wiki [1] manually from markdown to mediawiki, instead to convert the >> existent wiki pages to anything plus setup a new engine and configure >> user accounts. > If that is converted from markdown, all you would have to do is use the > markdown directly if the new wiki supports it. > >> Btw: Would a conversion to another wiki mean that we get another long >> footer on every wikipage "This page was edited by... do not remove..."? > I have no idea about that, but that alone shouldn't stop this from > happening. > >> For the special case of the Gentoo Manual: >> I think the Gentoo Manual is better maintained in a git repository, >> because it was initially written like a book and sometimes it is better >> to make PRs for the manual. > I don't really see the manual as a special case. We should use the same > interface for everything. > > William 1) I think this idea was floated before, and failed before .. 2) Existing wiki team are badly understaffed, how would this improve things? How would new maintainers be registered and managed? 3) Are you volunteering to implement this change yourself (infra are equally understaffed) and manage the change and transition, in addition to your existing commitments? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:20:53PM +0200, Jonas Stein wrote: > > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? > > I think the wiki is very useful and should remain. Like I said, there are wiki packages out there like gollum, ikiwiki, and probably others which would allow editing of content via text files and use vcs's for version control of the changes, so I'm not advocating for shutting down the wiki. I think we should have one that is more accessible to users who want to use different interfaces. We shouldn't be forcing users to use a full web browser just to contribute to the wiki. > > It would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another > > similar format > > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. > > I think it is more efficient to convert your yearly contributions to the > wiki [1] manually from markdown to mediawiki, instead to convert the > existent wiki pages to anything plus setup a new engine and configure > user accounts. If that is converted from markdown, all you would have to do is use the markdown directly if the new wiki supports it. > > Btw: Would a conversion to another wiki mean that we get another long > footer on every wikipage "This page was edited by... do not remove..."? I have no idea about that, but that alone shouldn't stop this from happening. > For the special case of the Gentoo Manual: > I think the Gentoo Manual is better maintained in a git repository, > because it was initially written like a book and sometimes it is better > to make PRs for the manual. I don't really see the manual as a special case. We should use the same interface for everything. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? I think the wiki is very useful and should remain. > It would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another > similar format > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. I think it is more efficient to convert your yearly contributions to the wiki [1] manually from markdown to mediawiki, instead to convert the existent wiki pages to anything plus setup a new engine and configure user accounts. Btw: Would a conversion to another wiki mean that we get another long footer on every wikipage "This page was edited by... do not remove..."? For the special case of the Gentoo Manual: I think the Gentoo Manual is better maintained in a git repository, because it was initially written like a book and sometimes it is better to make PRs for the manual. [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/WilliamH -- Best, Jonas signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 01:47:19PM -0400, Brian Evans wrote: > On 7/3/2018 1:39 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > All, > > > > some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring > > it up here as well. > > > > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very > > nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format > > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. > > > > For what purpose? The Handbook? No objections to that as it is limited > access already. We just go back to what we were doing in CVS. We should definitely use git not cvs. :p We don't have to go back to what we were doing in cvs,. There are wikis out there such as gollum, gitit and ikiwiki to name a few, which allow full access to the content via vcs [1]. William [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8255749/wikis-with-vcs-backends signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
On 7/3/2018 1:39 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > All, > > some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring > it up here as well. > > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very > nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser. > For what purpose? The Handbook? No objections to that as it is limited access already. We just go back to what we were doing in CVS. If there is to be a replacement, then it should be equal access to what we have now. Users can create and edit pages which are not protected (currently by namespaces). This should continue IMO. Brian signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
